Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.19950223Aspen City Council Regular Meeting February 27, 1995 Mayor Bennett called the meeting to order at 5:05 p.m. with Councilmembers Reno, Richards, Paulson, and Waggaman present. CITIZEN COMMENTS There were no comments COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS 1. Councilwoman Richards told Council she will be attending the CAST meeting in Denver with the state legislators to discuss items of significance to resort communities. 2. Councilman Paulson said the Parks Master plan is scheduled for P & Z review Tuesday, March 7. 3. Acting City Manager Bill Efting reminded Council there is a work session Monday March 6 to discuss ballot language. Efting asked if the transportation/parking issues could be added to the work session. Council agreed. 4. Acting City Manager Bill Efting said there is a joint work session with the County Commissioners March 7 at 5 p.m. in Plaza 1 CONSENT CALENDAR Councilman Reno requested to remove Board appointments to the end of the agenda. Councilman Reno said he has a conflict of interest on the Valley Hi extension and will not be voting. Councilwoman Waggaman moved to read Ordinances #13 and 14, Series of 1995; seconded by Councilwoman Richards. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #13 (Series of 1995) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL GRANTING A FIVE MONTH EXTENSION OF VESTED RIGHTS APPROVED BY ORDINANCE 8, SERIES OF 1991, FOR THE SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVED FOR THE 1000 EAST HOPKINS PARCEL, THE VALLEY-HI APARTMENTS, LOTS A, H, I, K, & S BLOCKS 25 AND 26 PLUS THE REMAINDER OF VACATED CLEVELAND STREET, CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO ORDINANCE #14 1 Aspen City Council Regular Meeting February 27, 1995 (Series of 1995) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN GRANTING A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION AMENDMENT TO THE CREEKTREE SUBDIVISION was read by the city clerk Councilwoman Richards moved to adopt the consent calendar as amended; seconded by Councilwoman Waggaman. The consent calendar is: · Ordinance #13, 1995 - Valley hi Extension of Vested Rights · Resolution #12, 1995 - Fairway Mower Contract · Aspen Child Care Committee Emergency Grant Request ($3445 to the Little Red Schoolhouse) · Ordinance #14, 1995 - Creektree-PUD Subdivision · Resolution #13, 1995 - Appointments of Auditors · Resolution #14, 1995 - 1995 Vehicles Purchase Contracts · Resolution #15, 1995 - Purchase Street Sweeper Councilwoman Richards requested the adjacent property owners of the Valley Hi be notified about the second reading of this ordinance. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #4, SERIES OF 1995 - Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures Amy Amidon, planning office, told Council the city’s land use code requires staff to reevaluate the historic sites and structure inventory every 5 years. The buildings on the inventory list are reviewed by HPC for demolition or relocation only. This is not the same degree of review of landmark structures or those in the historic district. Ms. Amidon told Council this reevaluation has been on going since 1993 because of the public notice requirements. Ms. Amidon told Council she has met with individual property owners on specific questions. Ms. Amidon told Council Ordinance #4 adopts 60 sites on the inventory. Only 4 property owners disagreed with their structures being on this list. Ms. Amidon recommended Ordinance 4 be adopted as presented. Mayor Bennett opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Bennett closed the public hearing. Councilwoman Waggaman asked if there is more information from those who disagreed with being included on the inventory. Ms. Amidon told Council one of these 4 properties is eligible for the National Register; the other 3 structures have been identified as historic for a number of years. Ms. Amidon told Council these 4 structures have been on the inventory since at least 1986. Mayor Bennett said people do not like to have government review; however, the historic significance is one thing that increases the property values. Mayor Bennett said 2 Aspen City Council Regular Meeting February 27, 1995 the great good of the community calls for historic preservation. Councilwoman Waggaman said she does not like trying to second guess HPC, which is appointed by Council to evaluate the inventory. Ms. Amidon noted there are state historic income tax credits. Mayor Bennett asked about the inclusion of the Maroon Creek bridge on this list. Ms. Amidon said this bridge is listed on the National Register of Historic Places; it was an original transportation route. In 1919 when the railroad no longer ran, people drove across it as it; it is one of the primary accesses to town and has been unaltered except for the road deck. Councilwoman Richards said when one looks at pictures of historic Aspen, this bridge stands out as extremely significant. Councilman Reno said Council should relook at how buildings are rated. Councilwoman Richards moved to adopt Ordinance #4, Series of 1995, on second reading; seconded by Councilman Reno. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Waggaman, yes; Reno, yes; Paulson, yes; Richards, yes; Mayor Bennett, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #1, SERIES OF 1995 - 303 E. Main GMQS Exemption Kim Johnson, planning office, reminded Council this is approval of affordable housing mitigation for the 303 East Main commercial redevelopment. Ms. Johnson said P & Z forwarded a recommendation to approve the purchase of a two-bedroom unit to accommodate 2.11 persons for the new commercial project. P & Z also recommends in case an affordable unit is not secured by the applicant, prior to the issuance of c/o, cash should be accepted because of the difficulties of building units on site. The size of the project is not conducive to an on-site housing. Ordinance #1 contains the condition that if an affordable housing is not purchased by time of c/o, the applicant has to come back to Council, describe the process and get approval for cash payment. Nicklaus Kuhn told Council he is closing on the unit tomorrow. Kuhn told Council this is a difficult process to go through. It would be much easier just to make a cash-in-lieu payment. Kuhn said his son took the time and went through all the units that were available that could be deed restricted in order to meet this condition. Kuhn said he feels people should try harder and find a unit which would help get more housing into the inventory. Mayor Bennett opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Bennett closed the public hearing. Councilwoman Richards said she would like a report from the housing office on how these scattered site units are being monitored. Dave Tolen, housing director, said his office approved this unit on the condition that it be owner-occupied, which makes monitoring it much easier. 3 Aspen City Council Regular Meeting February 27, 1995 Councilman Reno moved to adopt Ordinance #1, Series of 1995, on second reading; seconded by Councilwoman Richards. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Waggaman, yes; Paulson, yes; Richards, yes; Reno, yes; Mayor Bennett, yes. Motion carried. WILLIAM RANCH ANNEXATION AND REZONING Councilman Reno moved to table Ordinance #61 and Ordinance #66, 1994, Williams Ranch Annexation and Rezoning to March 13, 1995; seconded by Councilwoman Waggaman. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #2, SERIES OF 1995 - 939 E. Cooper Subdivision Rezoning and GMQS Exemption Leslie Lamont, planning office, told Council this property is 10,500 square fee and is currently zoned RMF. The applicant’s request is to split this into 6,000 and 4,500 square foot parcels. The applicants also request rezoning with a historic designation overlay on the entire 10,500 square feet; rezoning parcel 2 to affordable housing, and leaving the 6,000 square foot parcel as RMF. Ms. Lamont told Council the applicants plans to refurbish both the historic house and barn on the property. There will be 2 free market units on parcel 1 and 1 free market, 1 RO and 1 deed restricted unit on parcel 2. The applicants requested variations from HPC. The minimum sideyard setback in RMF is 5 feet, the total is 15 feet. The applicants have complied with the minimum of 5 feet but only have 10 feet on each side. The sideyard setback in the affordable housing zone the minimum is 5 feet; the applicants meet that. The total is 15 and the applicant has 10 feet. The front yard setback in RMF is 10 feet; the applicants are providing 7 feet. The front yard setback in AH zone is 10 feet; the applicants are providing 5 feet from the road. Ms. Lamont pointed out the property is being subdivided east to west rather than road to alley. The rear yard setback in the AH zone is 18 feet for the barn to 5 feet. The required rear yard setback is 10 feet. Ms. Lamont reminded Council the applicants are using 2 incentive programs. The affordable housing zone allows applicants to increase the allowable density on property and also provides special review for parking and open space. The AH zone also allows free market housing outside the GMQS competition. The applicants are also using the historic preservation incentive program which allows for dimensional variations. The applicants are offering the city 2 refurbished historic structures, one deed restricted RO and one deed restricted category 3 unit. The allowable floor area currently on the parcel is 10,500 square feet. This proposal is 6,829 square feet which is a 35 percent reduction on the parcel from allowable. There will be 5 detached single family houses on the property. Ms. Lamont said at first reading Council requested several revisions; one was 4 Aspen City Council Regular Meeting February 27, 1995 maintenance of the sideyard setback. The applicant has met the minimum 5 feet around the external of the property; however, the total proposed is 10 feet, not 15 feet as required. Another revision was to turn the barn so that it is perpendicular to the alley. The applicant met with HPC who agreed that was a better site plan. The applicants looked at duplexing the two units on the rear of the property; HPC was not supportive of putting two of the units together. Bob Langely read from the Aspen Area Community Plan in support of vitality of full time residents, the creation of in-town affordable housing with density increases to encourage revitalization. Jake Vickery, architect, went over the site plan. Vickery told Council the applicants tried to design the project to be compatible with the community by creating 5 separate structures rather than one large building. Vickery said this project does not rely on tax subsidies; the community is getting some deed restricted housing. This is a small scale project mixing employee housing, RO units and free market units together. The project preserves some historic structures. The open space is in the center and is usable by all units. Vickery pointed out changes from the first reading are that the east and west setbacks have been increased to 5 feet; the space between all units has been increased to 10 feet. Turning the historic barn allowed the increased space between the buildings as well as get some parking on to the site and decreasing the size of some garages, which reduces the mass of the project. Vickery said the light wells have been reduced to the minimum code requirement. Vickery showed Council models of the project before the changes and as being presented. Mayor Bennett opened the public hearing. Jim Curtis told Council the housing board was very supportive of this application. Curtis said these applicants are taking a big risk to try and solve their housing problem on their own behalf. Don Erdman, Chairman HPC, told Council the Historic Preservation approved this project and feels it shows the advantage of flexibility in sideyard setbacks. Phoebe Ryerson told Council she wholeheartedly supports this project. Don Crawford, representing 4 units in the Villager, asked about the off-street parking for the project. Vickery said there are 4 for the 2 free market and 4 for the other units. There are 15 bedrooms in the project. Crawford noted people will occupy these bedrooms and will have cars. This part of town is already overcrowded with cars. Stephen Kanipe, neighbor, told Council he supports this project as the neighborhood has been disappearing and this will be a stronghold for families. Marcia Goshorn said this is a local family trying to house themselves and doing it without a subsidy. Ron Krajian said he, too, is worried about the parking situation. Steve Buettow supports this project as it is 5 detached houses, which will be more affordable to people living in Aspen. Mayor Bennett closed the public hearing. 5 Aspen City Council Regular Meeting February 27, 1995 Councilman Paulson said he is concerned about the neighbors, the taking away of light and air. Councilwoman Waggaman agreed about he nearness of the buildings. The building to the east has had a view for years. This project is broken up instead of one massive structure. Councilwoman Waggaman said she would like this project to be less dense; however, it fits within the city’s codes. Councilwoman Richards said she likes the fact that the restored historic house and the free market units are 1700 square feet instead of monster houses. This lot could have a 10,000 square foot building rather than 5 units totaling 6,500 square feet. Councilwoman Richards said she is concerned about the egress through the window wells and would like to see in the conditions of approval include a provision about snow removal for these windows wells. Councilwoman Richards said she would like the city to focus on Cooper avenue and enhancing the sidewalks and pedestrian experience. Councilman Reno asked if the FAR that is not being used can be used at a future date. Ms. Lamont said the AH zone district is using up the allowable square footage. The FAR for multi-family housing is greater than that for single family or duplex. Councilman Reno said he has always questioned the one car per bedroom parking requirement. The reality is probably more like 2.4 cars per residence. Councilman Reno said he is concerned about the distance between the buildings internally. Mayor Bennett said he shares the density and square footage concerns. Mayor Bennett said he feels this project has improved since first reading. This project has followed the rules; it is 35 percent smaller than a straight multi-family project on the same lot. This is the type of housing that a lot of Aspenites are looking for; it fits the architectural style of some parts of Aspen and is very compatible. Mayor Bennett said the applicant should not be penalized for the underlying zoning. City Attorney John Worcester suggested adding a new paragraph 16 on page 6 to read “All light and egress wells shall be kept free and clear of snow accumulation” and at section 4 add from residential multi family (R/MF) to affordable housing (AH). Worcester added pictures of the property and the Villager next door into the record. Councilwoman Richards moved to adopt Ordinance #2, Series of 1995, with the amendments outlined by Worcester and an advisory to the applicants to examine ways to continue to create greater space around unit E and breaking up height and closeness of the buildings; seconded by Councilman Reno. Roll call vote; Waggaman, yes; Richards, yes; Paulson, yes; Reno, yes; Mayor Bennett, yes; Motion carried. ORDINANCE #9, 1995 - 939 East Cooper Historic Designation 6 Aspen City Council Regular Meeting February 27, 1995 Amy Amidon, planning department, told Council HPC and P & Z both unanimously recommended approval of the historic designation finding that 3 standards are met; architectural importance, neighborhood character, community character. Mayor Bennett opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Bennett closed the public hearing. Councilwoman Waggaman moved to adopt Ordinance #9, Series of 1995, on second reading; seconded by Councilwoman Richards. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Reno, yes; Paulson, yes; Richards, yes; Waggaman, yes; Mayor Bennett, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #12, 1995 - Extension of Ordinance #35, 1994 Stan Clauson, community development director, told Council this Ordinance extends Ordinance #35, 1994, to May 30, 1995. Staff has been working to address the issues of large structures, light, setbacks, character and design guidelines. There was a symposium. A check list has been developed to control size but not stifle architectural creativity and not remove owner’s property rights. This will provide for a process to enhance building in close proximity. Clauson said staff has a schedule to create an objective check list and to work with Council’s suggestion revisions and to engage the architectural committee in modeling efforts. Mayor Bennett opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Bennett closed the public hearing. Councilwoman Waggaman said she supports this ordinance but is disappointed it has to be extended. A lot of progress has been made and this is going in a good direction. Councilwoman Waggaman said she would not support a second extension. Councilwoman Richards moved to adopt Ordinance #12, Series of 1995, on second reading; seconded by Councilman Paulson. Councilman Reno said he still does not support this as he does not agree with where the problem is. There are a number properties built to the maximum FAR accepted because of how they are designed. Roll call vote; Waggaman, yes; Paulson, yes; Reno, no; Richards, yes; Mayor Bennett, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #11, SERIES OF 1995 - Amending Housing Guidelines - Definition of Dependent 7 Aspen City Council Regular Meeting February 27, 1995 Dave Tolen, housing director, told Council this is an amendment to the existing housing guidelines adopted in 1994. These changes relate to the sale of 3 bedroom units. There is a lottery coming up soon for the East Hopkins project and these amendments are being considered in front of the annual adoption of the guidelines. Tolen told Council the housing board has a number of meetings regarding the priority for sales units. Some people object to priority being given to families of 3 or more for 3 bedroom units. Tolen said the housing board forwards a recommendation that a child can qualify as a dependent as long as he or she lives with the family a “majority” of time. The former definition was 9 months out of the year. The housing board also addressed the priority of families with dependents for 3 bedroom units. Tolen said people brought up issues that households are not static, that household needs are not fixed. The housing board recommended eliminating the priority. Tolen pointed out 140 families were in the top priority for the Castle Creek Valley lots, which points out the significant need for family- oriented housing and the lack of such housing. Tolen said the housing board recommends continuing the priority for households with children and/or dependents. Mayor Bennett opened the public hearing. Person objected to families with children getting priority for 3 bedroom units. Couples without children should be allowed to enter the lottery with another employee for the third bedroom. Councilwoman Richards said it is difficult to enforce these type of coalitions. Councilwoman Richards said the priority for people with dependents is for 3 bedroom units only. Councilwoman Richards said she feels this has to do with overall square footage of units rather than how many bedrooms there are. Councilwoman Richards said she feels having children in the community humanizes the community and they are a resource for this community. Mayor Bennett pointed out families are excluded from studios and one-bedroom units. Mayor Bennett said he feels it is fair that families get priority in 3-bedroom units. Councilwoman Richards said this discussion has pointed out the design of two-bedroom is important and maybe these units need more living space for a couple rather than a third bedroom. Councilwoman Richards pointed out the Truscott is all studios and one-bedroom. The Kraut project, by design, discriminates against families. Councilwoman Richards noted this conversation points out that employee housing is an incredibly scare resource. Councilwoman Richards said the overall land use plan is being changed so that in all future land use approvals, 60 percent will have to be for RO or deed restricted units. Person asked what happened to the extra points for longevity. Councilwoman Richards said the issue is how to prioritize someone’s 8 Aspen City Council Regular Meeting February 27, 1995 contributions to the community. The guidelines were set at priority of living in the community at 4 years, which seems to indicate a commitment to Aspen. Dave Tolen, housing office, pointed out the housing guidelines apply to units which are developed with a public subsidy or those required because of development. The guidelines do not apply private sector affordable housing projects. The developers of Williams Ranch set a priority of 10 years as well as how much effort a person put into helping get the project through the process. Mayor Bennett closed the public hearing. Councilwoman Richards moved to adopt Ordinance #11, Series of 1995, on second reading; seconded by Councilman Paulson. Councilman Paulson said he does not like a system that favors having children in an already over-crowded world. Councilwoman Waggaman agreed this is a frustrating and difficult topic. Councilwoman Waggaman said she is voting against this because of the frustration over the family priority. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Paulson, no; Reno, yes; Richards, yes; Waggaman, no; Mayor Bennett, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #3, 1995 - Aspen Youth Center SPA Amendment Councilman Reno moved to table Ordinance #3, Series of 1995, to March 13; seconded by Councilwoman Waggaman. All in favor, motion carried. BOARD APPOINTMENTS Councilman Reno said he cannot endorse the slate of appointments as presented. Council directed the city clerk to set up interviews for people interviewed in December for HPC and to schedule interviews for Board of Examiners and P & Z and RFTA. These were scheduled for March 20th. RESOLUTION #2, 1995 - Setting Title for Election Question John Worcester, city attorney, reminded Council they are sitting as the Title Board to consider a proposed resolution outlining language from an affidavit of petitioner’s committee for a ballot question and the proposed summary for the initiated measure. Worcester pointed out only the proposed initiated measure will appear on the petition. The proposed question is “Shall the City of Aspen close Galena street between Hyman avenue and Cooper Avenue and close Cooper Avenue between Galena Street and Hunter Street, to all motor vehicle traffic with 9 Aspen City Council Regular Meeting February 27, 1995 the exception of mass transit vehicles to provide for a better pedestrian environment adjacent to the existing mall in downtown Aspen?” Councilwoman Richards asked if “motor vehicle traffic” implies moving traffic and suggested this say “to all motor vehicles and parking” to imply that you can neither drive nor park in this area. City Clerk Kathryn Koch reported no one has submitted any draft language. Brent Gardner-Smith, representing the petitioner’s committee, agreed with adding the “and parking” to the ballot question. Mayor Bennett opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Bennett closed the public hearing. Councilman Reno asked if “with little to no surface improvements” can be added so that people would be aware this is not going to be an improved mall. Councilwoman Richards said she feels that would be too binding on future Councils. All in favor, motion carried. SIDEWALK PROJECT 95 Council said they would like to discuss this on a regular agenda as the plan calls for sidewalks on all sides of parks. Council said they would like to hear from both the Neighborhood Advisory Committee and the Blue Ribbon Committee. Staff said they will bring back after hearing from other committees. Councilwoman Richard moved to adjourn at 8:10 p.m.; seconded by Councilman Paulson. All in favor, motion carried. Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk 10